Stephen Miller, Trump advisor, absolutely loses his mind when journalist José María Del Pino asks him where he gets his information about Venezuela’s supposed low crimes rates.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    The journalist asked him a very simple yes or no question and he screamed while refusing to answer it. How did he win the exchange? He acted like a baby. He even kept insisting that the journalist answer a yes or no question repeatedly.

    This is not what a winner looks like in a discussion with a journalist:

    • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      You’re making the mistake of thinking facts and good journalism are at all what Trump sycophants care about. To you and I it looks like the journalist did a good job and won the exchange, but all ‘they’ see is a white man yelling at an uppity immigrant about mocking violent crime in the US.

      • Bassman1805@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 days ago

        Nobody cares what Trump sycophants think. They are already voting for Trump and nothing is going to change that.

        To a reasonable person who is unmotivated to vote (the REAL demographic that needs to be courted), this makes the Trump team look absolutely deranged.

        • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          I mean, we’re talking about people that still, to this day despite all the evidence, are unsure about who they should vote for. If you’re trying to convince me that the undecideds are mental giants looking for the perfect rational argument to sway them one way or the other then you’re fighting an uphill battle.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            5 days ago

            They didn’t say how it CAN look, they said:

            I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won this exchange.

            What it looks like solely to Trump supporters was an addition of yours that they did not even imply.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          It’s because you’re not reading the entire thing and stopped paying attention when they used the word “won.” Go back and reread the entire paragraph.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            Okay, here is the entire paragraph. Please point out what I am missing:

            I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won this exchange. It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

            • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              The rest of the paragraph?

              It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

              Replace the word “won” with “got what he wanted from”

              I don’t know what you guys are seeing, but it is quite clear that Trump’s guy won got what he wanted from this exchange. It was probably the best result he could expect. And that is before the interview became viral and millions upon millions got to hear his whole speech delivered. The journalist is well intentioned, but the result is catastrophic.

            • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              The rest of the paragraph makes it clear the writer is speaking from how donald’s advisor (and sycophants) see it. ie:

              the best result he could expect.

              Not ‘only valid’, not ‘we’. It is not absolute proof, but, if you consider yourself a rational arguer then it is your duty to interpret statements in the best light possible.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Or “the best result” being that he is the “clear” winner.

                it is your duty to interpret statements in the best light possible.

                Does that include statements like “they’re eating the dogs in Springfield” and “schools are forcing children to have gender reassignment surgery?”

                How about “she became black?”

                • Cephalotrocity@biglemmowski.win
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Technically yes, you should evaluate those statements in the best light possible with the intention of rebutting with a valid counter-argument that results in a rational conclusion. Absurd declarations are typically the easiest to do so.

                  In your examples even the moderators evaluated it in their best light. They didn’t jump to declaring donald “the dumbest person alive” and/or “pro-immigrant executions” (although I would have found it hilariously entertaining). They simply said “here is our evidence disproving that claim”, and that is more than enough.

                  Back to the point of this discussion, you’re jumping to Ad Hominems instead of evaluating their good argument: That the ‘still(?!) undecideds’ will probably not agree with the interpretation that the journalist won because they’re idiots.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 days ago

                    What ad hominems did I make to the OP? Please quote me.

                    Also, I’m sorry, the “best possible light” interpretation of “she became black” is that it isn’t racist. It’s racist. Not considering it racist is pretty fucking disgusting.

    • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Exactly, he’s getting the attention that he wants, he’s in the headlines, you’re talking about it. Stop giving these people headlines.

        • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          Journalists will do whatever gets engagement to show numbers to advertisers and this kind of crap gets engagement as seen here. Whenever you engage with this type of content you are giving these people a platform to spout nonsense and lies.

                • PriorityMotif@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  So you engaged with the content, the ultimate reason why it was created in the first place. He’s not going to go through the trouble if it doesn’t make money. Might as well just scream into the void if nobody watches it.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    Exactly what influence do you think me watching it has on anything? You’re giving me far more power than I have. And you are not going to stop me from watching videos that sound interesting to me by trying to shame me out of it. On top of that, the video has 1.2k views. Big fucking deal. Videos with people getting hit in the balls have exponentially more views. He went through the trouble of earning himself a buck fifty.